Let's Start Paying College Athletes - The New York Times

     In the New York Times article, "Let's Start Paying College Athletes" by Joe Nocera, Nocera argues that it is unfair for college athletes to put in their labor force and get nothing out of it. He states that college athletes do get scholarships out of this but they can't possibly be content with something that doesn't even cover the full cost of attending college. He argues that top college coaches can make just as much, or maybe even more than a professional coach. College sports create such a big enterprise that together, it generates more than $6 billion dollars. That's more than the NBA itself, which is a national professional league. Broadcasting agencies and other television agencies, such as CBS, sign deals that are worth billions and billions of dollars. Nocera wants to let everyone know that is unjust for college athletes to get only a minimum scholarship, when they're making millions for coaches and billions for marketers. 

     I think the article, "Let's Start Paying College Athletes" by Joe Nocera is completely in line and I support it all the way. I believe it's not fair for students to put in hours and hours a week and go unnoticed about it. Studies say some college athletes end up putting in 50 hours a week, that's more then a full time job. This is compelling because the system is ripping off the college atheletes. NCAA states that they don't pay athletes to protect them from "commercialism" but the only thing they are doing is protecting their own revenue. This author makes a really good point when he states that college athletes raise millions and billions of dollars for others, but meanwhile, they only get a scholarship which doesn't even cover all expenses. So this leaves me with this question, if you were the one raising money for others but didn't get much out of it, what does that label you as?